July 2012

Slacktivism has become a word used to describe the well-meaning, but ultimately pointless efforts of Generation @ to make its presence felt in the world. Campaigns that seek to exploit modern technology are considered a kind of distraction: well intentioned, but ultimately doomed to failure due to the lack of real, tangible commitment or results. The most obvious example of this would be the KONY 2012 campaign, an Internet phenomenon that must have delighted the authors at Invisible Children, but which was instantly castigated as an adolescent fantasy piece by the establishment human rights world. Much as Macbeth would have it, KONY 2012 was seen as “a tale told by an idiot. Full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.” Given the fact that the original Kony video came out in March of this year – and that five months is practically an eternity online – it is interesting to look back on this infamous “slacktivist” campaign to see where it went and what, if any, tangible effects it had.

The first thing anyone mentions in regards to KONY 2012 is the fact that the video was watched more than 100 million times in a week. While proponents pointed to this viral success, opponents focused on two main issues: that watching a video was not the same as actually doing something (Slacktivism at its most ignoble) and that the content distorted the situation on the ground and would do more harm than good by focusing attention on American intervention as the only hope for peace. Cries of “Imperialism” resounded quickly due to the film’s projection of Africa as a kind of neo-Hobbesian nightmare. However, as crass as some of the narrative may be, it is astonishing how much critics focused on the idea that the film had a point of view. The fact that the people at Invisible Children have an agenda does not seem all that unusual in the non-profit world. Rather, it would appear to be something of a pre-requisite for getting into the business. Why the particular narrative in KONY 2012 was a point of contention is apparently linked to the fact that, for once, people in the West were actually paying attention. For those with an interest in human rights and IR, nothing in the video was new. The same litany of horrors had been doing the rounds for decades as a result of exhaustive reportage from groups such as Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International, or the Ugandan NGO Refugee Law Project. The problem is that the number of people interested in such matters is regrettably quite small. People in the West just didn’t care very much, and for all the complaints about oversimplification, the old school human rights world had not done a very good job of getting the word out.

The real critique here was apparently that the KONY 2012 video was not telling the story in a way they approved of. Of course, disagreements over the appropriate response to humanitarian issues are nothing new in the NGO world. Getting two NGO’s to agree to a common response to anything is a minor miracle. What was new was the fact that a minor player had pushed their own agenda in a successful manner and in a way that connected to their target demographic: young, internet savvy Westerners who could be leveraged as a political voice in their own internet savvy societies. Every disapproving editorial piece in Foreign Affairs just served to re-enforce the notion that the rest of the HR world was busy kicking itself at being behind the curve.

So, do those 100 million views actually translate into anything other than a feeling of self-satisfaction in the college dorm rooms of the global north? The majority of opinion pieces simply branded it “Slacktivism” and associated it with a short attention span and lack of serious intent amongst Generation @. It will come as no surprise, however, that there are other organizations that actively court the same demographic. The most prominent is MoveOn.org, a political powerhouse predicated on the notion that young folk can make their voices heard via the net. Another example would be the One campaign against Aids. But the fact that others work the same beat does not mean it is necessarily successful. Perhaps other metrics such as petitioning could be used to chart the usefulness of Slacktivism? In many ways this is the very basis of traditional grass roots campaigning, and a staple of well established groups like Amnesty. Three weeks ago the KONY 2012 campaign handed a petition signed by 3,729,816 people to the United Nations Security Council. To put that into perspective, when you visit the UN Building in New York City, outside the main chamber is a display from an organization called “Mayors for Peace,” advocating for a nuclear free world. The display holds 1,000,000 signatures, and was described as a landmark achievement, and the “voice of the world’s people” by Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. So, Slacktivism apparently works quite well in this sense.

Still, that is just the UN—an institution often regarded as big on talk, but not really effective on the ground. What about the intended effect in the United States? After all, the explicit aim of the KONY 2012 video was to excerpt pressure on the US government. Perhaps in an election years it was optimistic to think that a viral campaign would have much of an effect. On the other hand, the folks at Invisible Children called the concept “KONY 2012” for a reason. While ROMNEY 2012 and OBAMA 2012 duked it out in the media, KONY 2012 would attempt to ride the electoral wave. The results appear to have been pretty good. In June, the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs unanimously passed H. Res 583/ S. Res 402, calling upon the United States to continue the deployment of military advisors, expand support for regional programs, and ensure that the President keeps Congress fully informed of efforts to track down and capture Joseph Kony. Once again, Slacktivism appears to have done exactly what was asked of it.

Lastly, and with a view to looking at Slacktivism in general, an argument can be made that dismissing 100 million views as mere “sound and fury” misses an important lesson from the “real” world of business. The Direct Marketing Association states that on average you can expect to get a 2.6% response rate to a direct marketing campaign. From 100 million views, that translates into over 2.6 million “customers.” In fact, the DMA suggests that the direct response rate for non-profit campaigns is closer to 5.23%. The idea that people would willingly respond to unsolicited advertising, and yet somehow would NOT respond to a viral campaign appears to be illogical. If you read an advertisement for a new iPad, you are an active consumer… but if you watch KONY 2012 you are a Slacktivist!

Regardless of your personal response to the narrative in KONY 2012, it is disingenuous to suggest that Invisible Children is at fault for the success of their campaign. They have a view, and chose to express it (very successfully) in this manner. More significant to this exploration of Slacktivism is the fact that KONY 2012 is a resounding demonstration of the new age of activism in the Global North. The era of the viral campaign has arrived, and it is important that activists co-opt this new form, or risk being left floating in its wake. One thing is abundantly clear in our brave new world – The Slacktivists of Generation @ are not too concerned with whatever connotations we negatively attach to their name – they already know how effective they can be.

James Walker is a fourth year Global Studies Major at UCLA, and a lifelong social activist. His research interests focus upon international governance and institutional legitimacy, with an emphasis on personal accountability, and the development of the International Criminal Court.

The Slacktivism of Generation @: A New Era of Human Rights Activism? was last modified: July 28th, 2014 by James Walker

Today marks the third annual “Nelson Mandela International Day” as Mr. Mandela celebrates his 94th birthday in Qunu, the Eastern Cape. The first Mandela Day commenced on July 18th 2009 in New York City with volunteering, educational events, and fundraising which lead to the concert series at Radio City Music Hall; however, it was not until November 2009 that the United Nations General Assembly officially declared it “Nelson Mandela International Day.” Recognizing and remembering the ills of the apartheid government, the conflicts, the atrocious human rights abuses, and the appalling racial issues that the people of South Africa suffered through in the quest for democracy (just 18 years ago) are all encompassed in this day.

The fight for democracy, social justice, and freedom, consumed 67 years of Mr. Mandela’s life with 27 years spent in prison, 18 of those years were spent on Robben Island in cell number 466. As no one was called by name on Robben Island, Mr. Mandela became known as cell number 46664, beginning his sentence in 1964. Mr. Mandela gave the number, known as “four, double six, six, four” to Project 46664 as a lasting reminder for the values and rights he so passionately believed in and fought for. Project 46664 began as a global call for the prevention and awareness of HIV/AIDS that has since evolved to encompassing broader issues of social injustice and other humanitarian rights that Mr. Mandela stands for. As part of the celebration of Mandela Day, each of us should strive to volunteer 67 minutes, since Mr. Mandela spent 67 years, in making the world a better, more just place, for all people.

Throughout the week of celebrations for Mr. Mandela during this July, the second wife of Mr. Mandela, Ms. Winnie Madikizela-Mandela, continues to stir up disagreement and debate within the African National Congress (ANC) political scene. No one denies that her past has been both quite remarkable and mottled especially during the late 1980s regarding her entwinement within the apartheid movement. Ms. Madikizela-Mandela continues to stir public interest as evidenced by her recent scathing letter to the ANC in regards to Mr. Mandela’s birthday and the century celebrations of the ANC. What she views as nothing more than shabby treatment by the ANC concerning the Mandela family, Ms. Madikizela-Mandela addressed Mr. Jackson Mthembu (ANC party spokesman) in a letter stating: “We (the Mandela family) only matter when we have to be used for some agenda.” The controversy surrounding Ms. Winnie Madikizela-Mandela runs deep in South Africa. While some hold a fervent belief of discordance with her, she still holds strong grassroots support and ardent backing from certain ANC members. However one may feel about her, she has brought to light the debatable topic of whether the public and ANC only use the Mandela name when publicity, notoriety, or support is needed.

The general sentiment here in Johannesburg remains one of utmost respect and admiration for Nelson “Madiba” Mandela, but Ms. Winnie Madikizela-Mandela remains notoriously divisive. While trying to understand the multifaceted and complex historical reality of the recent past in South Africa, today let us all disregard the political game playing and instead strive for unity, a solidarity that not only seeks equal rights and social justice but furthermore social cohesion, not just in the rainbow nation of South Africa but of the world. As one volunteers their 67 minutes today, let us remember the reasons and ways that so many have fought before us for social justice so that we are able to stand together as one people. Further, let us not just spend a little over one hour of one day devoted to the global call to action for each of us to make a small change for the betterment of all, rather let us make it a lifestyle. In the words of Mr. Mandela himself, “Sometimes it falls on a generation to be great. YOU can be that great generation. Let your greatness blossom.”

Sara Pilgreen is a doctoral student at the UCLA Luskin School of Public Affairs and has served in the Peace Corps in the Republic of Vanuatu. Her research interests include macro practice, extreme poverty, and community-based participatory research.

In Honor of Nelson Mandela Day: Let Your Greatness Blossom was last modified: July 19th, 2012 by thegeneration